The lottery's spinning wheel of ironies

The quiet and stillness of Bethlehem vs. the hustle and bustle of the holidays

A focus on the poor and needy vs. a monument to wealth and possessions.

Then, amidst all of these juxtapositions comes the ultimate Christmas contradiction: a Powerball jackpot of almost a half billion dollars.

The estimated $550 million Powerball drawing Wednesday — won by parties in Missouri and Arizona with some notable dribbles (a $1 million ticket bought in Burlington has yet to be cashed in as of this writing) was the hottest topic of conversation nationwide last week. Some do so puffed up with cynicism, pointing out the immeasurably long odds of winning. Others talk in an almost dream-like state, visualizing what winning would be like. Moralists look at disdain at the entire spectacle.

We take a more pragmatic approach.

First, it is interesting to consider the role that our favorite value — liberty — plays in lotteries.

On the one hand, lotteries involve voluntary interactions. One can choose to buy zero tickets, one ticket or quite literally spend every penny they have on lottery tickets. People are also free to spend their money on any other product or service available in the market. So, from a consumer standpoint, purchasing lottery tickets is a completely voluntary exchange.

But, alas, the lottery is still not a purely market-driven event. Only the government, under current law, can administer a lottery.

Why should this be?

The real answer is that the government is only willing to suspend its moral judgments (like prohibitions against gambling) when the government stands to benefit. Further, the government knows that if lotteries are opened up to market forces, the government lotteries will eventually lose. Folks ought to be free to play lotteries or gamble at their leisure — it is their money and they should be able to spend it how they wish.

So, this lottery isn’t truly a market-driven event.

Yet, we must say, this is actually a more palatable way for the government to raise money than plain old taxation. Lottery players, presumably, understand that a chunk of their “investment” does not go to the prize pool, but, instead, goes to pay for government programs. In that way, it’s a form of a “user fee” which is always preferable to taxation. In our state it’s called an Education Lottery.

Finally, a comment on the morality of this spectacle. We see nothing wrong with either dreaming of lottery riches or pointing out the infinitesimal odds of actually winning. It’s OK to fantasize and it’s OK to “keep it real.” While we wouldn’t presume to define what “restraint” looks like when it comes to investing in lottery tickets and surely wouldn’t advocate coercion to enforce such a definition, we urge people to not let their dreams exceed the dollars in their bank accounts.

In the meantime, the holiday season chugs along — from the quiet holiness of the Advent season to the jingling of cash registers.